(Picture Courtesy of USA Today)
As we prepare for the Superbowl, let’s take a look at the owner of the Pittsburgh Steelers, Dan Rooney. He supported Barack Obama for President and presented him with a Steelers jersey when his team won the AFC. Now Rooney’s team might end up visiting the White House if the Steelers can vanquish the upstart Arizona Cardinals.
Rooney is “the only owner in the NFL with a policy named in his behalf, the Rooney Rule, which was instituted in 2003. It stipulates that teams with a head coaching vacancy must interview at least one minority candidate.”
What makes this story even more interesting is that Rooney and Obama don’t agree on abortion. Here are a few excerpts from a U.S.A. Today article wherein Rooney discussed how difficult it was for him to get past Obama’s pro-choice position:
Rooney said it was not easy to reconcile differences with Obama. A devout Catholic, Rooney is staunchly anti-abortion. It fueled the most intense criticism, he says, of his endorsement of Obama.
“I did not support him on that issue,” Rooney said. “People really came after me on it. … But I don’t think I lost my integrity over this. This was not about a single issue.”
Rooney set aside his feelings about abortion – and now he can enjoy watching his friend begin his four year term as our next President.
Whoopy -doo!
junior,
I have a feeling Rooney was none too pleased when President Obama recently restored Federal funding to international groups that provide abortions or give advise on the issue. In fact that action by Obama was condemned by the Vatican a couple of days ago.
But I do think Rooney was right in that we shouldn’t trip over this one issue. And I also think the Steelers are going to win the Superbowl – even though I will be rooting for the Cardinals. I always go with the underdog…
“One issue” – one issue!!
Yeah – one issue out of the hundreds of issues on which I disagree with President Obama.
You say one issue – oh I agree Art. I was originally a Rudy G supporter – hardly a pro-life candidate.
junior,
Rudy’s flame-out in Florida was epic. I really thought he would fare better.
Ultimately, it was Obama’s year. I don’t think any of the Republican candidates could have defeated him.
I too disagree with him on many issues, but I was relieved to see him win. I don’t think McCain would have been a good President, and Palin scared the Hell out of me.
Maybe you, among others, need a good scare Art.
Ronald Reagan scared the hell out of a lot of people in 1980.
Junior,
Palin is no Reagan. If the GOP banks on her four years hence their goose will be cooked.
I have a post going up today about the future of the GOP, based on an article in Reason Magazine. Palin does not impress them either.
Art,
I am not saying that Palin should be the Republicans pick. Who ever the reeps select to run in ’12 against Obama should also be ready to run in ’16 – in case BHO does not fall on his face during his first term.
Really junior, haven’t the last 8 years been scary enough. I think Dan Rooney has figured out that we as a nation are on the verge of losing our middle class and poor people CAN’T buy tickets to Steelers games. Money trumps principles.
anonster said: “I think Dan Rooney has figured out that we as a nation are on the verge of losing our middle class ..”
Oh really anonster – the dems are concerned about the middle class? Robert Reich testified to congress that white male construction workers should not get infrastructure jobs under the stimulus plan.
And Rangel tells Reich that he doesn’t have to worry about middle-class opposition to their social engineering plans for the stimulus. Why? Because they’re too busy working!
This is the epitome of arrogance. This is astounding!
So much for the dems “concern for the middle class.” Pure horse sh*t.
See and hear for yourself:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opxuUj6vFa4
junior, yes the Democrats are concerned about the middle class but they are also concerned about the poor (I know that’s a real mind-blower for you). If you read the full context of RR’s testimony, he’s addressing fears that the stimulus will only aid those in the best position to weather this downturn and will not provide opportunities for women and minorities by creating jobs beyond construction work.
I think the problem junior, is this is going to be nuanced and well thought out policy, not the black and white, what’s in it for the rich, type of governing you have been used to for the last 8 years.
nuanced: dem New-speak for bullsh*t
To give a further example of dem Newspeak – The word free still exists in Newspeak, but may only be used in such statements as “The dog is free from lice” or “This field is free from weeds.”
It may not be used in its old sense of “politically free” or “intellectually free,” since political and intellectual freedom no longer exists even as concepts, and are therefore of necessity nameless.
Newspeak is designed not to extend but to diminish the range of thought, and this purpose is indirectly assisted by cutting the choice of words down to a minimum.
George Orwell’s 1984 is upon us.
anonster – How do you explain (spin) this:
Congressman Charlie Rangel tells Reich that he doesn’t have to worry about middle-class opposition to their social engineering plans for the stimulus. Why? Because they’re too busy working!
You know junior, I’ve started several different responses to you, each time realizing the futility in trying to reason with some one so prone to knee-jerk reactions that they can find sinister motives for fairness and inclusion.
My hope is that the Democrats can craft a stimulus package that can encompass and create a wide range of job opportunities. Our economy, already in peril, will only get worse if they fail.
Respectfully, the diminished “range of thought” is your own, you are narrow-minded, short-sighted, belligerent and over estimate your mental prowess.
anonster said: “Respectfully, the diminished “range of thought” is your own, you are narrow-minded, short-sighted, belligerent and over estimate your mental prowess.”
Leave it to a liberal like anonster to rage and attempt to belittle an opponent when they are cornered and have lost a debate. Are you and Red Vixen going together?
“Respectfully” – and then lay an attempted belittlement like that? You are a jokester anonster.
I would suggest you answer my debate query rather than foam at the mouth about beligerance and mental prowess. Your reply amounts to “you are dumb junior and I am smart, so I win” – great debate point there anonster.
Please come up with a respectable debate position rather than playing your little distraction games.
The Orange Juice Blog is sorely in need of an honorable and worthy liberal opponent. Vern Nelson is greatly missed.
Heck, I would even settle for Sean Mill. Where is Sean?
At least he does not rage and call names. These two clowns Red Vixen and anonster,(oops a derogatory name slipped out there), have no arguments. All they have is invective and vituperation.
junior, I did answer you, you just didn’t like my answer. Case in point; “nuanced: dem New-speak for bullsh*t”, WHO’S “raging” and “belittling”?
I stand by my points, the Democrats are trying to create a jobs package that has opportunities beyond standard construction work. Just read this headline; TENS of THOUSANDS lose jobs as recession deepens, that’s just for TODAY, junior.
You and your ilk may want to howl about perceived slights but this country is in deep trouble. The “righties” better have something more to offer than their usual pettiness and pity parties or they will become even more irrelevant.
I do have to agree with you on one thing; I miss Vern too.
All hail junior slayer of liberals (in his own mind). Meanwhile all the liberals could care less about junior or about beating him on the blog.
Yawn, same old, same old, junior.
anonster: “.. the Democrats are trying to create a jobs package that has opportunities beyond standard construction work.” (????)
What type of jobs do you hope to create other than “stanard construction jobs” on construction projects which are designed to exclude white male construction workers?
And you have NOT answered my question –
anonster – How do you explain (spin) this:
Congressman Charlie Rangel tells Reich that he doesn’t have to worry about middle-class opposition to their social engineering plans for the stimulus. Why? Because they’re too busy working!
anonster said: “.. this is going to be nuanced and well thought out policy ..”
Charlie Rangel said: “.. Reich doesn’t have to worry about middle-class opposition to their plans for the stimulus – because they’re too busy working!”
Is this what you mean by nuanced and well thought out policy? I call it arrogant, devious and ham-handed – and yes it is also bullsh*t.
junior, first, when you quote some one, in this case Charlie Rangel, they actually have to have made that particular remark, second, you need to hear or read the full remarks in context. Naked emperor news is spinning what RR and CR are saying, and it isn’t what they actually said or meant.
If you want to spend the next 4 years stomping about in phony outrage over made-up crap, go ahead. I for one am done with it.
anonster – Word for word from Congressman Charlie Rangel speaking to Robert Reich concerning directing stimulus funds away from white males and away from control of state legislatures:
Congressman Rangel:
“One thing that you can depend on, you don’t have to be worried about what the middle class is going to do.”
“Things are SO bad – they have to put food on their tables, get clothes on their kids and get them in school.”
Tell me anonster what Congressman Rangel means by these statements.
Tell me junior , WHAT were the statements before and after, you can’t pull statements out of context and make pronouncements on their meaning. To make an informed judgement I need the entire transcript. Cherry picking is for fools.
anonster,
The meaning is plain – and your obfuscations are apparent.
BTW – I checked with the House website, the official transcripts are not available at this time.
Yes junior, CR is saying that the middle class is reliable and hardworking but struggling to keep up. Sinister, indeed.
anonster said: “Yes junior, CR is saying that the middle class is reliable and hardworking but struggling to keep up. Sinister, indeed.”
You left out the CONTEXT of Charlie Rangel speaking to RR on his desire to direct stimulus funds away from white males and away from control of state legislatures – and therefore the middle class is so busy trying to save their own asses that the congressional criminals can get away with looting the pockets of the hard working tax paying middle class.
How conveniently you disregard context “anonster” when it suits your purpose of obscuring the facts.
Junior, YOU HAVE NO CONTEXT!!!!!!!!!!!!! Those were EDITED remarks.
There’s an old saying “Never try to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig”. The jokes on me though, I’ve wasted my time and I’m annoyed.
“Junior, YOU HAVE NO CONTEXT!!!!!!!!!!!!! Those were EDITED remarks.”
The statements themselves are self evident of the context. If the Dems in the House would allow the transcrpits of the hearing to be released and entered on on the House website I would be able to provide those.
What is Nancy Pelosi hiding by not allowing those transcripts to be released?